The UK government has put forward amendments to the UK-US Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA), aiming to secure the continuity of nuclear cooperation between the two nations.
A significant aspect of these amendments is the removal of the expiry date for certain provisions within the agreement, which is set to expire in December 2024. These changes were outlined in Command Paper 1135, published on 25 July 2024.
According to a research briefing by Claire Mills for the House of Commons, “Many of the proposed changes are minor technical amendments relating to outdated language, definitions and terminology and to reflect the different classifications of information that may be exchanged under the MDA.” However, three key amendments are particularly noteworthy:
- Article 4 establishes reciprocal provisions for naval nuclear propulsion cooperation, allowing the UK to transfer technology and share information with the US.
- Article 5 removes the expiry provisions related to Article III bis, allowing the MDA to remain in force on an “enduring basis.” Consequently, the agreement will not require renewal every ten years.
- Article 13 introduces provisions to ensure that information, material, or equipment shared under the MDA will remain protected if the agreement is terminated by either party in the future.
The MDA, established in 1958, facilitates the exchange of nuclear materials, technology, and information between the UK and the US. It is crucial for maintaining the UK’s independent nuclear capability while fostering collaboration with the US.
The memorandum accompanying the proposed changes states that “the MDA forms the basis for UK-US cooperation on the safe and reliable maintenance of the UK’s nuclear deterrent.”
These proposed amendments come in response to a more volatile international security environment, as both the UK and the US continue to modernise their strategic nuclear deterrents. The briefing also notes the importance of the amendments in “ensuring cooperation in the future” and making naval nuclear propulsion provisions reciprocal.
As the amendments progress through parliamentary scrutiny, the deadline for any resolution opposing ratification is set for 23 October 2024. Under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, both Houses of Parliament can review the proposed changes, although only the House of Commons has the power to block ratification indefinitely.
Sounds reasonable. Having something that has lasted so long continue until Parliament actively stops it, rather than wasting their time periodically renewing it, seems like a no brainer.
I concur.
All this will go through without a blip if Harris is elected in November. If not things could get complicated.
Trump is more friendly to UK than the Democrats.
Trump is an opportunist, if he wins first thing he will do is throw Ukraine under the bus the phrase, they make a desert and call it peace comes to mind
Trump was the first president to send weaponry to Ukraine…
A firm no nonsense statement from Trump stating that he would do whatever it takes to allow the Ukrainians to push out the Russians would be do him many favours at home and abroad. It is the lack of such leadership which many have realised suggests he seems nieve on defence issues.
Trump didn’t give us a trade deal when in office. Was he that friendly to us then?
It was the closest the UK had been to having one so technically yes. However how much of that was down to the relationship between him and Boris will be an unknown, unless he gets back in and see if he puts one forward for the UK then.
Trump isn’t a friend of the USA!
The dems are far more hostile to the uk than the republicans
I don’t believe it would make much difference in this case.
The MDA is a treaty and any amendments require the approval of 2/3rds of the US Senate. The chances of extending the treaty indefinitely without an expiration date are slim and none.
Would you like to put money on that ? It’s an election year and 000’s of US defense jobs are wrapped up in this and the AUKUS project.
MDA was a US Republican Treaty in the 1st place.
The FT agrees with you, unlike the click bate title and minimal article UKDJ has on the subject they have put out a full break down. It’s not Britain proposing this like we are some fucking beggar it’s a mutual agreement that’s been worked in since AUKUS and the Biden Whitehouse has already put this forward to congress and it’s expect to pass with little difficulty. This is just yet another article made to make the UK look bad, when the reality is this should be a celebration. The world’s most powerful nation doesn’t hand out freebies (except to Israel).… Read more »
Like I mentioned to you a few weeks ago. It’s not that Biden and the Democrats dislike the UK as some would have you think. There was a general feeling in US political circles (Dems and Reps) after Brexit that the UK was being pulled to the far right and Brexit looked like the first domino falling for a divided Europe. You didn’t get much complaining from the maga repubs because they only cared about what Trump thought and he looks like he’s always trying his best to please Putin.
I don’t think any US politician of any political party thinks much about the UK or anything beyond US boarders since Clinton. It’s not Biden or anyone in the Democrats coming up with extending this treaty. I doubt few even know it’s exists. The Republican’s no longer exist as a coherent political body they are just a collection of individuals pursuing their own short term political gains at the cost of anything and everything America use to hold dear. Fortunately for us all US UK cooperation runs at a much deeper level than politicians. It’s the military, security services, diplomatic… Read more »
Yes, it’s at one or two levels down from the presidential, where all the the decisions are made. Influenced by a whole spectrum of pressure groups.
Probably the most important U.K. Defence announcement this decade. And I’m not joking as it ensures stability, sustainability and future proofs commitment.
Profound bit of good sense, hope it goes through.